Reply #45: Bureaucracy is wasteful and often redundant, yes. [View All]

[UdoKier]

But even bureaucracy is a form of job creation. And unlike military spending, it doesn't create a backlog of weapons systems that need to be used up so that there will be a need for MORE weapons systems - the whole thing is just a racket.

I just reject the notion that our government needs to be "starved". People on the receiving end of government programs have seen their benefits eaten away for decades, and your "solution will only make that worse. The tendency has been to cut veterans' care, welfare, unemployment, forest rangers, whatever BEFORE the bureaucracy is ever touched.

The government was as small as it had ever been in over 30 years by the end of the Clinton administration. Had it not been for Bush's irresponsible tax cuts, the government might not have even gone into the red (the recession would have happened, but 9-11 might well have been averted if Gore had taken his rightful place as president).

I might have overreacted to your post, but the problem with the old right-wing "starve the beast" rhetoric is that that is NOT their real intention, at least not as you define it. They MO has always been to cut taxes to create massive deficits, then force radical cuts to essential services. They are always very reluctant to make cuts to the bureacracy (but they love to strip away govt' workers' civil service protections) So that we end up with a government that's just as big, less efficient, and stuck in spiraling deficits because their trickle down flim-flam schemes NEVER create enough stimulus to bring revenues up to where they need to be.

I'm all for cutting wasteful government spending, like that rainforest in Iowa, or the phony missile defense shield, but not "starving the beast". That always creates phony budget "crises" where they decide to slash health care for kids or education funding.

Enough already!